The limits of the Scientific Revolution and the end of Technocracy…
Beyond Reductionism : The decline of a Modern Day Utopia
--
“Within a Metaphysics of quality, Science is a set of static intellectual patterns describing this Reality, but the patterns are not the Reality they describe”…
— Robert Pirsig
In the article — Synthesis [1] — the emergence of the Natural Sciences from the 1850s to 1880s and their rise to the centre stage of our modern-day Society was presented.
A Scientific Naturalism [2] where all alternative forms of knowledge, such as theology, philosophy and practical wisdom, were subordinated.
Science’s value to Society was able to be clearly demonstrated by its practical utility —a process of revealing codified rules of semantic abstraction — Verstand — that literally could be used by humanity to create a Phenomenological World (Second Nature).
Applying this new knowledge fuelled the profound technological advancements associated with the Industrial, Scientific and Digital Revolutions.
Growing the economy and accelerating human prosperity.
Science had become the new religion [3] in our pursuit of a Modern Day Utopia.
God was Dead [4].
Verstand — a rules-based Reason anchored in formal & symbolic logical deduction — Cartesianism Rationalism [5] and Reductionism.
Ground Truths, in some cases, could be reduced to a Statistical P-Value [6] — classical, binary, deterministic and absolute.
An orthodoxy had replaced a heterodoxy.
Dogma and social consensus supplanting fallibilism, open inquiry, epistemological humility, and a recognition of the eternal nature of the Human Condition.
A materialist [7] technocratic view of reality had emerged, a Technological Society.
Simplicity, where there was complexity.
Discrete Parts where there was a Continuum — entangled relationships and interdependencies [8].
Human bodies as machines, and human brains as computers.
A new vernacular for the 21st Century – the Fourth Industrial Revolution – Computational Biology – Bioengineering – Genetic Engineering – Artificial General Intelligence.
It was turtles all the way down [9].
A Technocracy is an ideological system of governance in which decision-making is made by persons elected by the population or appointed based on their expertise in a given area of responsibility, particularly concerning scientific or technical Knowledge [10].
It was starkly illustrated in a 1905 manifesto, a book titled — Modern Utopia [11] — by English writer HG Wells.
A Society where a voluntary order of nobility known as The Samurai oversaw a kinetic World.
A World ruled by socialist ideals enforced by a voluntary austere elite.
A powerful vision of a future anchored in a Scientific Technocracy [12].
A Techno Utopia [13].
A world where technologists and scientists ruled.
Where modernity was reliant on scientific culture [14] and genuine knowledge could be certain and absolute.
Where Society had become anchored in Scientific Management [15], and the Algorithmic Mind [16] took centre stage — Algorithmic Education, Algorithmic Risk Management, Algorithmic Computation, Algorithmic Investing, Algorithmic Economic Theories, Algorithmic Finance, Algorithmic Central Banking [16b], Algorithmic Biology, Algorithmic Food [17] including Algorithmic Milk [17b], Algorithmic Chemistry, Algorithmic Management, Algorithmic Advertising, Algorithmic Government[17c] and Algorithmic Politics [18].
Our experience of reality could now be reduced to Algorithmic Abstraction and Verstand.
Computational capsules — mental world rules — were derived by processing data through inference via techniques such as gradient descent to achieve optimal, efficient outcomes.
Had the Algorithmic Mind and Algorithmic Management become the primary way of leading a Technocracy?
But what if the Material World was Complex [19] and Uncertain [20]?
What if there were limits to knowing inherent in our Human Condition [21]?
What if Cause-Effect [22] is difficult to ascertain in Complexity?
What if our Ground Truths depend on the Axioms [23] — assumptions — and the Ground Motives — beliefs — that we make?
What if there were limits to statistical and mathematical [24] abstractions?
What if the Algorithms and Abstractions were leaky [25]?
Did context, agency, and our embodied lived experience — Material World [26] — matter?
What if this type of Science was anchored in our attempts to simplify Complexity — complexity compression [27] — rather than in our navigation of Complexity — our Survival Instinct[28][29] — our Grandmothers' Practical Wisdom[28]?
Had the emergence of a Global Pandemic and the building of Fat-Tail [29b] risks in our global interconnected and interdependent Financial System exposed the folly of this Technocracy?
A deep yearning — a desire for simplicity, certainty & knowing — a fake simple world — in a world of complexity and uncertainty — a complex real world.
Reality had become Hypernormalisation.
More and more questions are emerging that highlight the limitations of the prevailing classical Industrial Age [15] reductionist narrative in a Quantum Age of Entanglement [30][31].
Questions that go to the core of the Philosophy of Science [32], the application of statistics to determine Truths, the underlying Axioms [23] at its foundations and the increasing cartesian dualism [33] — rationalism & abstraction without empiricism & experience — that is being embraced.
In a World where all knowledge is interconnected, were there limits to Technocracies?
Scientific Axioms
German Mathematician and Philosopher Kurt Godel [34] was considered, alongside Gottlob Frege [35] and Aristotle [36], the most significant logicians in human history.
In contrast to other leading mathematicians in the early part of the 20th Century, such as Bertrand Russell [37] and Alfred North Whitehead [38], who were writing extensive works on the foundations of mathematics — Principia Mathematica [39] — in pursuit of seeking universal Ground Truths [26] anchored in term logic & symbolic reasoning, Godel’s Incompleteness Theorems [40] exposed the inherent limitations of such Logic.
The limits of every formal axiomatic system of modelling arithmetic.
In a March 2019 Paper titled — Philosophical bias is the one bias that Science cannot avoid [23] — a group of researchers raise similar foundational questions as they relate to Science.
In attempting to eliminate all forms of bias in their research, Scientists make a range of assumptions — Axioms [23] — of a non-empirical nature in conducting their research.
For example, Causality, Reductionism and Determinism.
The limits of logic [41] exposed by Godel had now been extended to the core foundations of Science.
P-Values
British geneticist and statistician — Ronald Fisher [42] — published a book in 1925 titled — Statistical Methods for Research Workers [43] — which outlined how researchers could apply statistics to understand relationships and derive conclusions.
A P-Value determined the compatibility of the empirical data being captured in research to a model which supported an underlying research hypothesis.
A 0.05 threshold could be applied as a guide in setting a high watermark for statistically significant results.
Despite the widespread adoption of this approach, these standardised scientific methods are increasingly being questioned and challenged.
The limits of abstract reductionism — a discrete heuristic, algorithm or statistical value — in expressing the relationship structures in a high-dimensional dynamic quantum Material World.
Can statistics, big data, and more & more information eliminate the uncertainty and complexity of reality?
Are these statistical relationships anchored in causation or correlation [44]?
How much of this quantitative data can express and make sense of the qualitative aspects of the Human Condition?
In an October 2020 US National Institute of Statistical Sciences Debate [45], a number of leading US voices explored and discussed their perspectives on p-values, confidence intervals for hypothesis tests, bayes factors and the reproducibility crisis.
The discussion illustrated the challenges.
The limits in making sense of the complexity of our Material World through mathematics.
It opened a pandora’s box of questions such as:
Is decision-making or model estimation more important?
How closely does the model align with a hypothesis?
Should multiple models be used?
Cartesianism and Science
Since the time of Rene Descartes — Rationalism[46] — term logic and deductive reason — has played a central role in Science.
Statistics, computation and mathematical proofs being embraced to support models and hypotheses.
But can these approaches anchored in abstraction — Mental World — be viewed separately from our experiences, predictions & experiments in the Material World [33]?
Hypotheses without observation, experiences and context.
Observations, experiences & context without hypotheses.
Materialism vs Idealism [47].
Cartesianism [33].
String Theory [48], Many Worlds [48], Artificial General Intelligence [49] and a Singularity [50].
Are these approaches science or simply claims in the “marketplace of ideas” [50b] — scientism?
Is science — a two-bodied (integrated) — a two-world [33][47] — Material World + Material World + Reflexivity [51] + Friction — approach to learning, new knowledge and new questions?
Are doubt and uncertainty central to Science[50b]?
An eternal search for Truth.
Philosophy of Science
In a September 2020 article titled — Beyond Kuhn and Feyerabend: After the fourth stage of philosophy of Science [52] — Paul Hoyningen-Huene [53] — philosopher of Science and author of — Systematically: The Nature of Science [54] — explores the history of the Philosophy of Science from Aristotle to today.
A key quote:
“At present, we are in the fourth phase, which started sometime during the last third of the twentieth century. In this phase, belief in the existence of scientific methods conceived of as strict rules of procedure has eroded. Historical and philosophical studies, especially by Thomas S. Kuhn and Paul K. Feyerabend, have made it highly plausible that scientific methods with the characteristics posited in the second and third phases do not exist and cannot exist. Scientific research situations, i.e., specific research problems in their specific historical contexts, are so immensely different from one another that it is utterly impossible to come up with some set of universally valid methodological rules to tackle them”…
For Science to evolve beyond the Fourth Phase of its evolution, the author presents ideas outlined in his book around the systematic nature of the scientific process relative to other Knowledge generating approaches.
Nine dimensions of Science, including — descriptions, explanations, predictions, the defence of knowledge claims, the generation of new knowledge, and the representation of knowledge — generate the internal structure of systematicity theory.
It’s an approach that represents a departure from 20th Century Philosopher — Karl Popper’s Theory of Falsification [55] (Scientific claims being true and not just useful for predicting phenomena — Scientific Realism [56] — a World independent of our Minds) and the prior distinction of Science from knowledge such as metaphysics.
A broader systemic approach to the nature of knowledge for a complex and uncertain World.
Aristotle’s Theory of Causality
Aristotle defined four causes [57] for how natural objects or systems — Material World — behaved.
It was a recognition of the multi-dimensional nature of reality.
A Theory of Causality beyond reduction and deduction.
A similar perspective was outlined in an August 1972 article by American theoretical physicist and Nobel laureate — Philip W Anderson[58] — More is Different[58b] — in the publication — Science.
Some key quotes:
“The workings of our minds and bodies, and of all the animate or inanimate matter of which we have any detailed knowledge, are assumed to be controlled by the same set of fundamental laws, which except for under certain extreme conditions we feel we know pretty well.
…The central fallacy in this kind of thinking is that the reductionist hypothesis does not by any means imply a “constructionist” one: The ability to reduce everything to simple fundamental laws does not imply the ability to start from those laws and reconstruct the universe.
…The behaviour of large and complex aggregates of elementary particles, it turns out, is not to be understood in terms of a simple extrapolation of the properties of a few particles. Instead, at each level of complexity, entirely new properties appear, and the understanding of the new behaviours requires research, which I think is as fundamental in its nature as any other…
…At each stage, entirely new laws, concepts, and generalisations are necessary, requiring inspiration and creativity to just as great a degree as in the previous one.”
US Philosopher Charles Sanders Pierce — Pragmaticism and the nature of Knowledge
Later in his life, Charles Sanders Pierce[59] revisited his ideas about Pragmatism[60] and the nature of knowledge.
Fellow pragmatists John Dewey [61] and William James [62] perspectives of Pragmatism were grounded in the perception of Reality by an individual — an alethic pluralism [63]. Many ways to be true.
Our knowledge and understanding of the World are based on our own personal experiences and learning.
In contrast, Charles Sanders Pierce diverged in his beliefs, shifting to new ideas — Pragmaticism.
He saw knowledge and our Ground Truths as a collective process — a monism about truth [64].
A common way of being true.
“The opinion which is fated to be ultimately agreed to by all who investigate is what we mean by the Truth, and the object represented in this opinion is the real. That is the way I would explain reality”…[65]
Peirce also questions Descartes’ understanding of reasoning:
“Philosophy ought to imitate the successful sciences in its methods, so far as to…trust rather to the multitude and variety of its arguments than to the conclusiveness of any one. Its reasoning should not form a chain which is no stronger than its weakest link, but a cable whose fibres may be ever so slender, provided they are sufficiently numerous and intimately connected”… [66]
In contrast to Cartesians, that began from a position of absolute certainty in reaching truth, the Pragmatists recognised the complexity and uncertainty of reality.
How can we identify and eliminate errors?
A fallibilism in our search for truths by embracing self-correcting approaches.
Essentially Pierce recognised the limitations of our Human Condition in navigating a complex world.
“in 1952, F.A. Hayek wrote what became The Counter-Revolution of Science. The idea is that in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, a new conception of science was born, which reversed a previous understanding. Science was not a process of discovery by research but a codified end state known and understood only by an elite. This elite would impose its view on everyone else. Hayek called this “the abuse of reason” because genuine reason defers to uncertainty and discovery while scientism as an ideology is arrogant and imagines it knows what is unknown”…
— The Intellectual Roots of Techno-Primitivism: https://brownstone.org/articles/the-intellectual-roots-of-techno-primitivism/
Our interdependencies and interrelationships both in our reasoning in making sense of this complexity — a Two World approach — anchored in perception and action — abduction — and — in reaching a collective agreement on the nature of reality.
In 1985 Philosopher John Hardwig [67] extended upon some of Pierce’s ideas in a paper that outlined a concept called epistemically dependence [68].
As our world has become more complex, Hardwig highlighted the dilemma:
“Either much of our knowledge can be held only by a collective, not an individual, or individuals can “know” things they don’t really understand[69] “…
[He chose the second option]
It was a recognition that in such a world, we simply do not have the time and skills to apply abstract deductive reasoning to everything we encounter in our day-to-day lives.
Did this represent a shift to Liquid Brains [70]?
In a Quantum World, will we move from simple heuristics — sources of binary statistical truths — to high-dimensional semantic interdependencies and interrelationships?
Embracing Charles Sanders Pierce, a two-world form of reasoning [71] — abduction — induction — deduction, Liquid Brains [70] and Collective Intelligence [72].
Beyond a Technocracy to open inquiry, learning to learn, sensemaking [73] and reflection.
A world where all knowledge is interconnected.
From Aristotle & Descartes to Pierce, Gebser & Habermas [74].
A shift in the nature of reason from the deductive abstraction of the Algorithmic Mind to the integrated embodied (Two World — Mental & Material) nature of the Semantic Mind [75].
Footnotes:
[1] — Synthesis — the-synthesis-of-two-cultures-90989cfb462e
[2] — Scientific Naturalism — https://helda.helsinki.fi/bitstream/handle/10138/29018/041.html
[3] — Science as New Religion — ://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-017-2428-9_19
[4] — God is Dead — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_is_dead
[5] —Rationalism vs. Empiricism — rationalism-empiricism
[6] — Scientists rise up against statistical significance — Valentin Amrhein, Sander Greenland, Blake McShane and more than 800 signatories call for an end to hyped claims and the dismissal of possibly crucial effects — https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00857-9
[7] — Materialism — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materialism
[8] — InterDependent — https://richardschutte.medium.com/interdependent-37749eb61eff
[9] — Turtles all the way down — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down
[10] — Technocracy — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocracy
[11] — Modern Utopia — http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/6424
[12] — Public health experts: The technocratic takeover of democracy comes at a high price for all of us — As Victoria enters a COVID-19 induced state of disaster, more transparency is needed between emergency response public health measures and their economic, social and political consequences — public-health-experts-the-technocratic-take-over-of-democracy-comes-at-a-high-price-for-all-of-us
[13] — The Dark Side of Techno-Utopianism — https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/09/30/the-dark-side-of-techno-utopianism
[14] — The Pandemic Is Exposing the Limits of Science — The financial crisis tarnished the field of economics. Will the coronavirus do the same for medicine? — https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-05-25/coronavirus-the-pandemic-is-exposing-the-limits-of-scientists
[15] — Re-Imagining Organisations for the 21st Century… — https://richardschutte.medium.com/re-imagining-organisations-for-the-21st-century-94d32e4e7e91
[16] — Virtual Reality — https://richardschutte.medium.com/virtual-reality-aa9a2e47afb5
[16b] – Cbank digital currencies and the path to Gosbankification – https://www.ft.com/content/cdab16f7-ae35-3258-a4ce-648d4add849c
[17] – How Ai and Genomics is reshaping Farming – As the world population grows and climate change intensifies, how can we transform the food supply chain to be more sustainable and resilient? Mike Zelkind, co-founder and CEO of 80 Acres Farms, is building a network of hyper-efficient, high-tech, indoor farms to provide local communities with fresh, nutritious produce. He joins Azeem Azhar to discuss the challenges of disrupting the farming industry to innovate the future of food – https://pca.st/episode/d58a102d-e4ec-497f-aa9a-d44cc2aed73d
[17b] – Algorithmic Milk – https://www.wsj.com/articles/plant-based-milk-built-by-machine-learning-hits-whole-foods-shelves-11604572200
[17c]— Algorithmic Government — Government_by_algorithm — Algorithmic Governance and Political Legitimacy — https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2019/05/algorithmic-governance-and-political-legitimacy/
[18] — Algorithmic Politics —Why ‘Ditch the algorithm’ is the future of political protest — https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/aug/19/ditch-the-algorithm-generation-students-a-levels-politics
[19] — The Complexity Void — https://richardschutte.medium.com/unbundling-complexity-503c77f0b261
[20] — The future by its very nature is uncertain —https://richardschutte.medium.com/the-future-by-its-very-nature-is-uncertain-823a7abae5ab
[21] — Speech, Action, and the Human Condition: Hannah Arendt on How We Invent Ourselves and Reinvent the World — https://www.brainpickings.org/2017/05/17/hannah-arendt-human-condition-speech-action/
[22] — There are no root causes in complexity — https://www.jenal.org/there-are-no-root-causes-in-complexity/
[23] — Philosophical bias is the one bias that science cannot avoid — 44929
[24] — A Short Guide to Hard Problems — What’s easy for a computer to do, and what’s almost impossible? Those questions form the core of computational complexity. We present a map of the landscape — https://www.quantamagazine.org/a-short-guide-to-hard-problems-20180716/
[25] — Leaky Algorithms and Leaky Abstraction— https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leaky_abstraction
[26] — In search of Ground Truths —https://richardschutte.medium.com/in-search-of-ground-truths-3817ce821572
[27] — Complexity Compression — https://richardschutte.medium.com/complexity-compression-8616193bef1e
[28] — The Survival Instinct… — https://richardschutte.medium.com/the-survival-instinct-dc770381566d
[29] —The Survival Instinct — Part 2… — the-survival-instinct-part-2-cb1065e22291
[29b] — Chris Cole — Chris Cole of Artemis Capital Management is the latest stellar guest to grace The End Game as he takes Bill and Grant on an extraordinary journey through the many ways in which volatility affects risk assets.From Golems & Tulpas to the Ouroboros, Chris paints a remarkable picture of the twin realms of fantasy and reality and how they intertwine to create the world around us.From the option market tail wagging the equity market dog to the assured disaster awaiting the pension fund industry, Chris explains volatility’s important role in the present and, importantly, the future.Don’t miss this profound conversation — https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-end-game-ep-10-chris-cole/id1508585135?i=1000497410684
[30] — The Age of Entanglement — https://richardschutte.medium.com/the-age-of-entanglement-556de9318378
[31] — When Two Worlds Collide — https://richardschutte.medium.com/when-two-worlds-collide-645e95bbfba7
[32] — What is philosophy of science (and should scientists care)? — what-is-philosophy-of-science-and-should-scientists-care
[33] — The Mind Body Problem — https://richardschutte.medium.com/the-mind-body-problem-5be10a6ccf5c
[34] — Kurt Godel — https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/goedel/
[35] — Gottlob Frege — https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/frege/
[36] — Aristotle — https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle/
[37] — Betrand Russell — https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/russell/
[38] — Alfred North Whitehead — https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/whitehead/
[39] — Principa Mathematica — https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/principia-mathematica/
[40] — Incompleteness Theorems — https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/goedel-incompleteness/
[41] — The Limits of Logic — https://richardschutte.medium.com/the-limits-of-logic-e6c27daf7687
[42] — Ronald Fisher — significant-life-fisher
[43] — Statistical Methods for Research Workers — https://www.haghish.com/resources/materials/Statistical_Methods_for_Research_Workers.pdf
[44] — nassim taleb page causation correlation — https://twitter.com/nntaleb/status/1082063513961533440?s=20
[45] — 2020 US National Institute of Statistical Sciences Debate — https://youtu.be/_D8U58QLqyM
[46] — Rationalism vs Empiricism — https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rationalism-empiricism/
[47] — Interdependent … — https://richardschutte.medium.com/interdependent-37749eb61eff
[48] — The crisis in particle physics — https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0048733377900300 — and — https://iai.tv/video/the-mystery-of-reality — and — Lost in Maths — https://youtu.be/KImZYGNdf7k
[49] — Why general artificial intelligence will not be realized — s41599–020–0494–4
[50] — The implausibility of intelligence explosion — https://medium.com/@francois.chollet/the-impossibility-of-intelligence-explosion-5be4a9eda6ec
[50b] — Why Doubt Is Essential to Science — If people don’t understand how science works, they can’t properly understand how to think about new findings — https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-doubt-is-essential-to-science/
[51] — Reflexivity — reflexivity-bdd9d0a0fc7d
[52] — Beyond Kuhn and Fayerabend: After the fourth stage of philosophy of science — https://iai.tv/articles/beyond-feyerabend-and-kuhn-auid-1644
[53] — Paul Hoyningen-Huene — https://www.philos.uni-hannover.de/en/hoyningen-huene/
[54] — Systematicity: The Nature of Science — https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225806498_Systematicity_The_Nature_of_Science — and — https://www.amazon.com/Systematicity-Nature-Science-Studies-Philosophy/dp/0190298332
[55] — Karl Popper — Theory of Falsification — https://www.simplypsychology.org/Karl-Popper.html
[56] — Scientific Realism — https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scientific-realism/
[57] — Aristotle on Causality — aristotle-causality
[58] — Philip W Anderson — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_W._Anderson
[58b] — More is Different — https://cse-robotics.engr.tamu.edu/dshell/cs689/papers/anderson72more_is_different.pdf
[59] — Charles Sanders Pierce —T he American Aristotle — charles-sanders-peirce-was-americas-greatest-thinker
[60] — Pragmatism — pragmatism
[61] — John Dewey — https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dewey/
[62] — William James —james
[63] — alethic pluralism — Alethic pluralism and the value of truth — https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11229-020-02625-z
[64] — Monism — https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/monism/
[65] — How to Make Our Ideas Clear — Charles S. Peirce — https://courses.media.mit.edu/2004spring/mas966/Peirce%201878%20Make%20Ideas%20Clear.pdf
[66] — Why Cognitive Science Needs Philosophy and Vice Versa — https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2009.01016.x
[67] — John Hardwig — https://philpeople.org/profiles/john-hardwig
[68] — epistemically dependence — HARED
[69] — Why you don’t really know what you know — One of the world’s biggest science experiments shows why everybody needs to re-examine what it means to know something — https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/10/21/1009445/the-unbearable-vicariousness-of-knowledge
[70] — A shift to liquid brains… — a-shift-to-liquid-brains-fba931fa8c1b
[71] — Why Philosophy matters more than ever in the Age of Entanglement?… — https://richardschutte.medium.com/why-philosophy-matters-more-than-ever-in-the-age-of-entanglement-8df9f23a90ae
[72] — The emergence of Collective Intelligence… — https://richardschutte.medium.com/the-emergence-of-collective-intelligence-1bd3f2e7a7c4
[73] — Sensemaking, the core skill for the 21st Century… — https://richardschutte.medium.com/sensemaking-the-core-skill-for-the-21st-century-ebc8c679cfe8
[74] — The Public Sphere… — the-public-sphere-ff07f74d7f22
[75] — The Semantic Mind — https://richardschutte.medium.com/the-semantic-mind-9147d7a5634b
[76] — Descartes was wrong: ‘a person is a person through other persons’ -https://aeon-co.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/aeon.co/amp/ideas/descartes-was-wrong-a-person-is-a-person-through-other-persons
